NWN2 only 20 hours long?

[Gromnir]

Yay, cos I haven't heard that line before.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What are you talking about?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

we think that it were that Tom Cruise movie...

 

Jessep: You want answers?

Kaffee : I think I'm entitled to them.

Jessep: You want answers?

Kaffee: I want the truth!

Jessep: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.

We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

Kaffee: Did you order the code red?

Jessep: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do.

Kaffee: Did you order the code red?

Jessep: You're goddamn right I did!!

 

we think that is what he is talking 'bout... though we disagree.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Llyranor]

"There've ALWAYS been sections (sometimes quite large ones, too) I didn't enjoy in all CRPGs I've played,"

 

and in spite of the fact that you "ALWAYS" has seen such stuff in the past you is gonna somehow imagine that nwn2 manages to cut all that stuff out... especially as it is a D&D game which is, first and foremost, a squad-based tactical combat game.  there pretty much has to be some meaningless combats if only to prepare you for the tougher ones latter on in the game. 

 

 

you have some rather strong evidence that game is shorter than 40 hours... by upwards of 20 hours.  you got any such similar reasons to believe that obsidian has managed to revolutionize crpgs and d&d so that you not got no fluff no more?

 

sorry, but your reasoning seems suspect.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Suspect? Perhaps.

 

Then again, I don't remember any of the CRPGs have '40-60 hrs' worth of story, or having so much memorable gameplay to fill up that much time.

 

Like I pointed out before, the issue wouldn't be with the 20-hrs in and of itself. It just has to do with game design and whether the format would just be a direct projection of past longer titles in the genre. As mentioned, NWN2 probably won't revolutionize genre conventions, nor does it seem to be aiming to. So, my comments as a whole *probably* don't apply to NWN2 (which, frankly, doesn't bother me that much, given that my main interest lies in the toolset). Still, design vs length.

 

As Dhruin mentioned, I don't remember Fallout being more than 20 hrs, either.

[Gromnir]

"Then again, I don't remember any of the CRPGs have '40-60 hrs' worth of story, or having so much memorable gameplay to fill up that much time."

 

not really the point is it? you already noted that crpgs "ALWAYS" has fluff. "always" were your word, not Gromnirs. you have played 40-60 hour games (fluff included,) that you did like, no? you must have, otherwise, by your own logic, you wouldn't likes any crpgs. nwn2 will be half as long as those 40 hour games with the fluff... but you got no reason to believe that the fluff has sudden vanished... so why the optimism?

 

somebody tells you that you is getting a 20 hour game, and your response is that you didn't want no 60 hour fluff-filled game anyway? if the problem is fluff, then how does the reduction to 1/3 your noted measuring time length improves the situation?

 

...

 

is some damned bad reasoning.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Cantousent]

I don't trust the source, to be honest. It seems pretty flimsy as a solid basis for assessing a game that isn't going to see the shelves for another some months. At this point, however, I'll throw out that I hope the packaged campaign lasts longer than twenty hours. If it's really great, and I'm sucked into the MP component this time, then the short length won't be as much of a concern.

[Llyranor]

somebody tells you that you is getting a 20 hour game, and your response is that you didn't want no 60 hour fluff-filled game anyway? if the problem is fluff, then how does the reduction to 1/3 your noted measuring time length improves the situation?

Again, design vs length. The design problem is still the same regardless of the game's length. It's a compromise, if you will. I'll take a shortened game if it means more actually pointful content is packed into it.

 

is some damned bad reasoning.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Or it would be, if a longer game actually resulted in a more memorable story or more compelling gameplay. My enjoyment of CRPGs has nothing to do with their length.

[Cantousent]

Well, there are two developers here. Care to comment? :Eldar's eyebrow raised with an enigmatic smile icon:

[J.E. Sawyer]

Well, there are two developers here.  Care to comment?  :Eldar's eyebrow raised with an enigmatic smile icon:

Ahahahahaha.

 

HELL NO.

[Colrom]

If the game is only twenty hours I will be disappointed - and may not buy it.

[Llyranor]

Well, there are two developers here.  Care to comment?  :Eldar's eyebrow raised with an enigmatic smile icon:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ahahahahaha.

 

HELL NO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

..... What?

[Gromnir]

...

 

"ALWAYS"

 

again we comes back to your word. 120 hour games. 80 hour games. 60 hours... 40... now 20? "ALWAYS." games has gotten shorter and shorter and they still gots your fluff. you noticed any improvement as they gets shorter? if nwn2 has fluff will your reasoning then require a reduction to 10?

 

bah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Joseph Bulock]

I'm just a tester, and honestly, I don't think I can say anything without overstepping my bounds. I will say that in my honest opinion, sans hype, sans trying to look good, Neverwinter 2 has lots of replay value. I'm always excited when I get to sit down and do progression testing (playing though large sections of the game), and I've been playing this game for almost a whole year now. Take that as you may, but I wanted to throw that out there.

[Llyranor]

Did you find those longer games more enjoyable and memorable (and particularly BECAUSE of their length)? I sure didn't.

[alanschu]

Gamespot reviewer isn't proof. Nice try.

 

When it turns into his word against yours, its more proof than you have given so far.

[Blank]

I'm just a tester, and honestly, I don't think I can say anything without overstepping my bounds.  I will say that in my honest opinion, sans hype, sans trying to look good, Neverwinter 2 has lots of replay value. I'm always excited when I get to sit down and do progression testing (playing though large sections of the game), and I've been playing this game for almost a whole year now.  Take that as you may, but I wanted to throw that out there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

YAY!

 

And one cannot expect any game to be the best ever while it is being developed. That is something discovered after playing for a year and still liking it as much as when you first got it. I am not expecting NWN2 to be the best ever, but I do expect it to be AT LEAST decent, based on all of Obsidians other games (i mean, 1 other game, hahaha). So if i get a game that is better than decent, and i enjoy it, that is more than enough for me. Good luck Obsidian

 

Oh, but heeding Grom's advice... U HAD BETT@R MAKE THE BEST GAME EVA! OR I WILL NEVER BUY ONE OF YO GAMES UH-GEN!11! IT HAS TO BE REAL GOOD, LIKE THE COOLZEST!

Edited April 23, 2006 by Blank

[Cantousent]

It makes sense, Gromnir. I'm sure games will always have some area or another that seems like fluff to some players. I'm pretty forgiving, but I can almost always see areas in a game I consider "fluff." Something meant to increase the time rather than the quality of the game. Actually, I'm not pretty forgiving. I'm a lot more forgiving than most folks in these parts.

 

As far as length goes, I wouldn't answer the question. There's no good way to answer it. Some folks want a shorter game and others want a longer game. ...And a game never meets time expectations exactly. Come on, who here has ever played a game for exactly the amount of time printed on the box? It's just nuts. Do you just go by the main quests? The game as played by one particular character type? Do you read fast? Do you like to try to admire particularly breath-taking scenes? It sounds like the game developers version of voodoo economics.

 

EDIT: The answer I received made me laugh out loud.

Edited April 23, 2006 by Eldar

[alanschu]

Q: How long will it take to beat NWN 2?

A: Its difficult to estimate it exactly, but you'll play 20 hours for sure. We want to ensure that a maximum number of players completes the game, and there are only few who play longer then 20 hours.

 

 

The only way you can interpret that is that the are aiming for a game that takes the average player 20hours to complete. Which means people like us will do it over the weekend.

 

 

But it sounds dodgy, why would OE care if a player finishes the game or not when hes already bought it? What possible reason is there for shortening a game so that the maximum amount of players finish it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Because people get enjoyment out of games that they complete. If the gamer loses interest because they feel things are going on too long, they'll have negative (or at least a less favourable) image of the game.

 

Furthermore, keeping length shorter helps keep costs down.

 

Just curious, do they teach any of this production stuff at your school?

[Gromnir]

Did you find those longer games more enjoyable and memorable (and particularly BECAUSE of their length)? I sure didn't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

bg2 is largely memorable 'cause there was so much to do. hypothetical: cut bg2 down to 20 hours worth o' gameplay. takes the best 2 or 3 quests from bg2 and then add ins a necessary intro and conclusion. then consider if it would be well remebered.

 

iwd were how long? 40 hours. cut in half so that we just finishes dragon's eye... imagine that empty feeling as you wonder why in the hell you paid $40 bucks for THAT.

 

a crpg w/o side-quests is more of an adventure game than anything else, and we has a hard time considering the kinda game that has an intro with a tutorial, a compelling main story/critical path quest, conclusion & more than a small handful of tangential sidequests at 20 hours.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 23, 2006 by Gromnir

[alanschu]

Well, if someone can't even be bothered to finish the game, they're less likely to be willing to invest in future titles.

 

Dunno about that. If that is so why do so many game have great starts and turn crappy in the end? Think Fahrenheit, Deus Ex, Kotor2, Planescape:Torment etc. etc. etc.

 

I don't think a Kotor2-type ending will really stimulate further sales, while somebody who only played till Dantooine will most likely feel like buying the next game...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

This makes no sense whatsoever. If a player couldn't have even been bothered to continue playing past Dantooine in the current game, why in the world would they think that the new game would be worthy purchase based on the previous game?

 

"Oh yeah, Obsidian....they made that game that I couldn't even bother finishing for whatever reason, I'm totally getting this game."

[Blank]

As far as length goes, I wouldn't answer the question.  There's no good way to answer it.  Some folks want a shorter game and others want a longer game.  ...And a game never meets time expectations exactly.  Come on, who here has ever played a game for exactly the amount of time printed on the box?  It's just nuts.  Do you just go by the main quests?  The game as played by one particular character type?  Do you read fast?  Do you like to try to admire particularly breath-taking scenes?  It sounds like the game developers version of voodoo economics.

 

EDIT:  The answer I received made me laugh out loud.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all, it made me laugh too.

 

Second, I agree about the time. Twill be different for every person. As Llyr's sarcasm pointed out, Oblivion has 80+ hrs. of content, but one can beat the main quest and feel "done" within 15. And i would be extremely dissappointed if rpgs got shorter than 20 hrs., but it is true that as realism becomes greater, it is harder to make more, since eventually people will demand that developers have to allocate for every aspect of reality that they can replicate.

[alanschu]

Or, if it's a '20-hr' game with a properly implemented story and ending, then they'd actually finish it and feel as though they played through a complete product.

 

Fahrenheit is around that time (maybe a bit shorter) and also didn't have a finished ending...

DX:IW has around that time, and look what became of it...

 

Sometimes (meaning often) a longer game (DX) will make more people buy another game (IW) than that shorter game will...

 

Edited in quote...this topic goes fast

 

As to overall SP length, who has the time to play a 60-hr game, anyway? Is a 4-hour movie necessarily better than a 2-hour one? Quality over quantity.

 

Looks at Oblivion sales. Sees how LONG some people already played that even if the release is still so close...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

More bunk.

 

A game like Deus Ex didn't make people buy IW because it was a long game. It made people buy IW because it was an excellent game, with fantastic story, excellent characters, etc. etc.

[J.E. Sawyer]

..... What?

The only non-jokey figures I'll give about game length prior to release will be based on my own experience. I haven't played through NWN2 legitimately from start to finish, so I won't give any estimation at all, nor comment on the veracity of Feargus' estimation.

[Gromnir]

..... What?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The only non-jokey figures I'll give about game length prior to release will be based on my own experience. I haven't played through NWN2 legitimately from start to finish, so I won't give any estimation at all, nor comment on the veracity of Feargus' estimation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

not after the nightmare that were HoW you won't.

 

"Oh, but heeding Grom's advice... U HAD BETT@R MAKE THE BEST GAME EVA! OR I WILL NEVER BUY ONE OF YO GAMES UH-GEN!11! IT HAS TO BE REAL GOOD, LIKE THE COOLZEST!"

 

good for you... but as we mentioned, your actions will be speaking much louder. sarcasm on the boards mean far less then actual sales... so if you really want games longer than 20 hours, then don't buy the game if you really wanna heed our advice.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 23, 2006 by Gromnir

[alanschu]

I think any explanation other than the fact that shorter = less content = easier and faster to develop is bull****.

 

 

 

But the downsides of shortening games are not to be taken lightly either

• Players will feel cheated when theyve paid full price for a game that only takes a weekend to finish
   
  
• A short game will not create the same kind of "buzz" that a game like Oblivion does, where people will chitter excitedly about their experience with the game over the course of several weeks. Instead, people will play it the weekend its released, do a sort of "postmortem" on it during the week after and then "Poof!" its gone from the eye of the public! No, free hype for you.
   
  
• If people finish the game quickly, theyll lend it to their mates the same week its released and those mates wont buy it, and you lose sales. If you had kept them playing that week, their mates would have gone "Damn, that looks fun. Ill buy a copy tomorrow"
  

and the list goes on. it doesnt really pay to be lazy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

• Unlikely, because most (as in significantly huge majority) of the games can be beaten in a weekend
  
• Surely you mean, a subpar quality game will not create the same kind of "buzz" as Oblivion. Half-Life had mountains of buzz, and it's not exactly a long game. And this buzz was long before any mods came out like Counterstrike, and before patches came to fix the crap netcode.
  
• This shouldn't really be a point, since it's nothing more than a guess
  

If it didn't pay to be "lazy," then games would be longer. You are in for a rude awakening if you finally get into the gaming industry.

[Llyranor]

bg2 is largely memorable 'cause there was so much to do.  hypothetical:  cut bg2 down to 20 hours worth o' gameplay.  takes the best 2 or 3 quests from bg2 and then add ins a necessary intro and conclusion.  then consider if it would be well remebered.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here's the thing for me: BG2 isn't well-remembered, anyway. What you consider good content, I saw mostly as just stuff to do. I didn't feel the game being longer made it any better. Enjoyment of the game had little to do with its length to me. Quality is key.

 

iwd were how long?  40 hours.  cut in half so that we just finishes dragon's eye... imagine that empty feeling as you wonder why in the hell you paid $40 bucks for THAT.

As a dungeon romp, the game consisted mainly of combat. Enjoyable, yes, but many of those encounters were just repetitions of previous encounters ('with a twist'). If the game was half as long but the design team spent that time making each confrontation more unique and memorable, I'd probably have enjoyed it more. There's a difference between halving game time and halving development time.

 

Second, cutting any story right in the middle is a lame example. A half-complete product is still a half-complete product, even if it's 200 hrs long. The same applies for the converse. Take IWD and throw in 20 hrs of additional combat (eg. same encounters over and over once again), spread across the same dungeons (or many even some new areas, but with no additional associated story). Still fun? How about making the PCs twice as slow? Lame design? Isn't IWD walking pace considerably faster than BG already, anyway?

[LoneWolf16]

"Is it me, or is there an overwhelming sense of cynicism here? How about a little positivity? Would it kill you guys not to condemn design decisions until you've actually had an opportunity to sit down and play the game"

 

if you don't wanna see more developers making shorter games, then tell them so.  the fan loyalty thing is something we don't get.  this is your opportunity as a consumer to speak to developers and tell 'em what you want and don't want.  do you want a game you can finish in a single weekend?  if so, then tell obsidian that 20 hours is good and great... but if you want more, then spit and curse and fume (w/i reason) and don't give a damned inch.

 

fan loyalty is a stoopid and misguided notion.  you not ever get a better game 'cause you tell josh or fergie or chrisA how perfect they is.  you needs to be giving positive and negative criticism to be getting better games... and you gotta be willing to not buy games that seems to be going in a direction opposite of what you want.  if you buy nwn2 at announced 20 hours then you is telling developers and publishers in the loudest voice possible that 20 hours is 'nuff for you... and publishers and developers will continue to shrinks games so that they not have to spend more money making.

 

optimism is wasted.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How am I being a fan boy? I was just calling for a bit more in the way of optimism, which is not wasted. And 20 hours is FINE, provided that it's a 20 hours I feel were spent well. If the game is a good one, the length shouldn't matter. Content is the be all and end all of every game...don't focus so much on the length. I agree, that I'd like it if these games were longer, but realistically, that's not going to happen. It's not a matter of "we didn't bitch enough, so they did it anyway" it's costs and what can be done within a certain amount of time and with a certain amount of cash. It's not like these guys aren't trying their damndest to give us a strong product...I mean, it's a reflection of themselves...so why not make it the best as can be?

 

I may very well be naive, but I prefer that over outright cynicism or dismissing a game I've been looking forward to simply because the length isn't 50+ hours.

 

after the nightmare that were HoW you won't.

 

good for you... but as we mentioned, your actions will be speaking much louder.  sarcasm on the boards mean far less then actual sales... so if you really want games longer than 20 hours, then don't buy the game if you really wanna heed our advice.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How does directy attacking the developer help?

 

And I'll wait for reviews, then buy this game. If there's strong replay value and the content is up to par with my standards, then I'm perfectly willing to speak through my $. If it's good, I want a developer out there who'll keep making games...hopefully a bit longer next time, but still great.